Patent Litigation

News & Analysis as of

Issue Two: Keeping Tabs on the PTAB

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

Upcoming Oral Arguments in BPCIA Litigation

On Friday, the United States Supreme Court set oral arguments in Amgen v. Sandoz for April 26, 2017. Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit announced that oral arguments in Amgen v. Hospira...more

PTAB Ruling on CRISPR: No Interference

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) ruled in favor of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in a closely watched patent fight with UC Berkeley over the breakthrough CRISPR...more

Enhanced Damages for Willful Infringement

Proving willful patent infringement became easier after the Supreme Court in Halo rejected the rigid two-part Seagate test for willful infringement, thereby removing a significant hurdle to an award of enhanced damages. In...more

Zircore v. Straumann: A Method of Manufacturing a Physical Object Is Not an Abstract Idea

In Zircore, LLC v. Straumann Manufacturing, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2017), as in many patent litigations since Mayo, Myriad, and Alice, the defendant moved to dismiss the infringement allegations contending that the patents in suit...more

District Court Stays Case Pending Inter Partes Review After Non-Petitioning Defendant Agrees to be Bound by Estoppel Provisions

In a previous order, the district court granted a motion to stay pending Inter Partes Review ("IPR") but deferred ruling on the Motion to Stay with respect to EMC Corporation "until EMC Corporation has filed a Notice with the...more

IPR Estoppel Provisions May Not Be That Scary After All

IPR petitioners wary of the statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) may have reason to be cautiously optimistic. Judge Sue Robinson of the Federal District Court of Delaware recently held that Toshiba is not estopped...more

Janssen v. Celltrion: Trial Postponed, Briefing and Hearings Scheduled on Standing, Damages Issues

As we previously reported, a jury trial in the ongoing infliximab biosimilar litigation, Janssen v. Celltrion (D. Mass., J. Wolf), was scheduled to begin on February 13, 2017. The district court, however, recently cancelled...more

Xilinx, Inc. v. Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Personal Jurisdiction Exists Due to Warning Letters and Prior Litigations in Forum - Establishing personal jurisdiction in the United States over a company operating in a foreign country can be difficult. How does a...more

BPCIA Litigation Roundup (Midwinter 2017)

Below is our midwinter update on the U.S. patent litigations concerning proposed or approved biosimilar products. For additional details, please consult our BPCIA Litigation Summary Chart or our previous quarterly updates...more

The IP Legal Minute - Quarter #1 2017: Examiner Legal Training

The USPTO recently released materials for training patent Examiners on how to rebut legal arguments during prosecution. Titled “Responding to Legal Arguments (RLA),” these materials train patent Examiners about (i) the basics...more

Privilege Claims Validated in Counterfeit Detection Dispute

In a recent decision, Magistrate Judge Kelley addressed the legitimacy of withholding third party communications under the common interest doctrine. The case involved plaintiff Crane Security Technologies, Inc. (“Crane”) –...more

PTAB Decides CRISPR Interference in Favor of Broad Institute -- Their Reasoning

On February 15, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rendered judgment that there was no interference-in-fact between the claims in interference between the Regents of the...more

Genentech Files DJ Action Against Amgen Regarding Avastin Biosimilar

Big Molecule Watch frequently posts on BPCIA litigation. As our readers know, the interpretation of various provisions of the BPCIA is currently before the Supreme Court in Sandoz v. Amgen, which we most recently covered...more

Divided Infringement – Expanding Patent Infringement Liability

In 2015, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals cast the net of patent infringement liability even more broadly, to cover direct infringement by “divided” (or “joint”) infringement. Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight...more

State Universities Gain Immunity from IPRs

State Universities Gain Immunity from IPRs - Today, many universities own extensive patent portfolios that are managed by sophisticated tech transfer offices. Universities obtain these patents for many reasons, not the...more

Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Apple filed a successful petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR) of Personal Web Technologies' U.S. Patent No. 7,802,310. In its final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) agreed with Apple's contention...more

Software Is Still Patent Eligible

In recent years, software patents have come under fire from legislation (the American Invents Act) that has generally made patents easier to invalidate, and from court decisions (the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS...more

PTAB Decides CRISPR Interference -- No interference-in-fact

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) handed down its decision today that there is no interference-in-fact between several patents and patent applications owned by The Broad Institute and...more

Beijing IP Court grants record patent damages & reimbursement of lawyers’ fees

The Beijing IP Court recently made headlines by granting a record amount of damages for patent infringement -no less than RMB 49 million (USD7.15m)-, one of the highest amounts since the court was established in November...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - February 2017

MPHJ Technology Investments v. Ricoh Americas Corporation (No. 2016-1243, 2/13/17) (Newman, Lourie, O'Malley) - Newman, J. Affirming PTAB decision in IPR that claims directed to document managing system and process were...more

UK: Drop in the ocean – Employee's invention not profitable enough for compensation

The UK Court of Appeal confirmed on 18 January that an employee was not entitled to any compensation from his employer for the income generated by his patented inventions, as the returns did not amount to an “outstanding...more

When Obvious Isn’t Obvious: Personal Web Technologies

On Valentine’s Day 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s conclusions of obviousness in Personal Web Technologies, LLC due to insufficient analysis in the board’s...more

Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB’s Obviousness Determination Due to “Inadequate” Rationale

On February 14, 2017, the Federal Circuit vacated an obviousness determination by a panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) due to an inadequate explanation of why the challenged claims were determined to be obvious...more

State Universities Rejoice: PTAB Recognizes Sovereign Immunity Defense

In Covidien LP v. University of Florida Research Foundation Inc., the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) upheld a defense of sovereign immunity asserted by the University of Florida Research Foundation (the...more

3,981 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 160
Popular Topics

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×